|
|
| |
Dialogue
Topic 3
|
| From
5 to 11 July |
| Voluntary
partnerships to support implementation, at all levels. Operational
criteria and modalities. Links with relevant World Summit on
Social Development (WSSD) partnerships and other existing ones. |
|
|
|
19.07.04
Omar G. Flores Beltetón (Guatemala) |
Dear Friends,
Here at San
Carlos University (Guatemala )we have good experience of voluntary
partnerships. In the year 2001 we obtained the Sasakawa Award
jointly with the UN Voluntary Program for a project in risk management
and prevention at local community level, in the East of the country.
Now the University is running for the second year a disaster
training course, in which, again, partnership with NGOs and local
and international institutions has been a good strategy. So a
wide range of options can be found for looking at and working
with the concept of partnerships,
Omar
G. Flores Beltetón (Guatemala) |
|
19.07.04 Hibak
Hersi |
Dear all,
I agree with
the proposed operational criteria and modalities. I do, however,
have two suggestions to add.
1) The first
suggestion is that the wording of this phrase (“The mechanism
is open to any combination of governments, local authorities,
and major civil society organizations including NGOs and the
private sector”) should be rephrased to emphasize the value
of using the media as a major partner in Disaster Preparedness
and Mitigation (DPM).
The ISDR secretariat
(as facilitator of partnerships) could provide mechanisms whereby
local and international media are encouraged to become key partners
in the promotion of DPM information. For instance, if the BBC
alone became involved in promoting DPM, imagine how many millions
would have access to lifesaving information. This information
may be as simple as a one-phrase sentence or paragraph that would
scroll at the bottom of the screen at the beginning or end of
each emission (i.e. X% of deaths during floods are due to people
attempting to drive in flood water). As organizations are often
willing to invest in community service work, the media and for
profit companies can pay for these very brief messages.
2) The other
suggestion is that the ISDR facilitate partnerships that focus
on promoting local rural communities’ and the urban poor’s
access to disaster literature. Much of the preparedness / mitigation
measures that can be taken are easy to implement/self-teach but
the problem lies in these groups’ access to information
that is language/culture sensitive. I suggest: improving individuals’ and
community groups’ access to disaster literature by encouraging
for-profit businesses, NGOs and other non-government and government
groups to partner in translating, carrying and disbursing such
literature free of charge (of course it could get expensive but
partnerships with for-profit groups could help defray the costs).
There is much disaster management literature/advice “in
English” online but it is of course often inaccessible
due to lack of access to funds to pay for internet use and/or
lack of access to internet facilities. This is an example of
an additional task that the ISDR secretariat could foresee.
Thank you for
the opportunity to participate.
Hibak Hersi |
|
19.07.04 Man
Thapa (Nepal) |
Dear all,
I agree with
Iqbal Zuberi(Bangladesh). In any developing and disaster prone country,
voluntary partnership is one of the sustainable mechanisms available to reduce disaster risk and to perform other disaster related activities.
I would like
to share one of our experiences in Nepal where we have mobilized
local communities to form or strengthen community organizations.
Such community organizations/institutions are called Self-Governing
Community Organizations (SGCOs). Such SGCOs are formed if there are none or strengthened if they are already there. They comprise both
men and women or are separate men’s/women’s groups depending upon
the situation. We found that such SGCOs are instrumental in mobilizing local
communities, resource mobilization, and serve as a bridge between local community
and outsiders. In many cases, SGCOs are now registered with the local administrative
office as NGOs. We have seen that such SGCOs are able to mobilize resources
locally and from outside, to design, implement and monitor/evaluate disaster
mitigation activities/ measures. After all, such organizations/institutions
are the first responders to any disaster. Therefore, all our efforts should
be to build their (and the local community's) capacity in voluntary partnership.
Man Thapa (Nepal) |
|
19.07.04 Meena
Raghunathan (India) |
I would like
to raise the following issues.
1) Education.
Education for preparedness is the key for better disaster management,
as several participants have pointed out. The issue is also 'how
to educate'. While it is essential to have things in the curriculum,
it is not enough that children learn the 'theory' of disaster
preparedness from textbooks. It will then be just another piece
of information they memorize and forget. To really make a difference,
the methodologies used for such education have to be more active
and participatory--from simulations, to case-study based learning,
to disaster mapping, to drills. The Centre for Environment Education,
India has been involved in developing such materials for schools
and would be happy to share information with anyone interested.
Another important
thing is that the awareness and education regarding disasters
needs to be really locale-specific: it is not enough that people
are told in general terms what to do. To be effective, they need
to know what to do when a particular disaster hits THEM, in their
city, town, village. Everyone will recall that the tragedy of
Bhopal was accentuated because the doctors did not know what
were the chemicals leaking out and therefore what to do for those
affected. Participatory processes of disaster mapping and preparedness
planning involving all stakeholders, are good ways to bring about
this awareness. Good quality information and access to this for
all stakeholders is key. Another problem is that soon after a
disaster, there is a flurry of activities on creating awareness
and education. But with fading memories of the crisis, the need
for such education remains only in intention and other priorities
take over. So we do need some interested party--NGOs, government
disaster related agencies, etc., who see it as their mandate
to focus and advocate for this and keep this in the public eye.
2) Partnerships
and capacity building at community level. A disaster focuses
attention on the site of the disaster. Many agencies - government,
NGOs, donors - all come to that site to contribute to rescue,
rehabilitation, etc. But this partnership with the community
must be seen in a long term perspective by all partners concerned.
The capacities of all the partners must be harnessed for the
overall development of the place, in the long term. It is rare
that so many institutions with so many different capacities come
into a place and the communities must be able to take advantage
of this, on their terms, in a slightly long term perspective.
In other words, the tragedy of the disaster must be turned into
an opportunity. There are several examples of this in Gujarat,
following the earthquake of 2001. Several agencies who came in
immediately after the disaster, have stayed on, built partnerships
with the community and taken up long term development initiatives
in the areas of education, natural resource management, institutional
development, etc.
3) Livelihoods.
It is true, as several people have pointed out, that it is the
poorest who are affected most. Related to this is the fact that
a number of rehabilitation efforts focus on reconstruction of
houses, schools, facilities, infrastructure, etc. The crucial
issue of restoring livelihoods is not always addressed in the
really sensitive and meaningful way in which it should be. This
issue of livelihoods has to be looked at in two ways. First is
restoring livelihoods in the immediate term: for example, providing
access to seeds and agricultural implements etc. which may have
been destroyed, to enable farming activities in the immediate
agricultural season. But the other aspect is also seeing this
as an opportunity for building capacities for enhancing sustainable
livelihood options--through analysis of what are the options
in a particular place, what is the training required, what are
the macro-linkages required, etc., and putting these in place.
Meena Raghunathan
(India) |
|
19.07.04 John
Norton (France) |
Re: discussions
about financial services to help protect the poor against disasters.
We have been providing targeted credit for the preventive strengthening of
houses in Viet Nam since 2002, and the reponse locally has been excellent -
large take up by the population (all extremely poor) and a very good repayment
rate. Families clearly consider that taking out credit for house strengthening
is a way of securing the environment in which they live and work.
John Norton
(France) |
|
19.07.04 Meena
Bilgi (India) |
Re: discussions
about financial services to help protect the poor against disasters
In response to Mr. R Kuberan’s comment on this subject, I would like
to share our experience. The flats (in an urban area) where I live have comprise
9 towers with 40 flats each. Only 2% of the owners have insurance for the flats,
the rest do not. Reasons: definitely, some can not afford it, but some think
that disasters won't happen again and again, so why waste money on premiums
? In rural India, it is difficult for the majority of farmers to obtain insurance,
hence innovative financial and insurance schemes are required for them. Yet
those farmers who can afford premiums, still don't. Reasons: either they are
ignorant or casual. People's awareness is important and I think we forget the
immense role that positive media can play here.
Meena Bilgi
(India) |
|
19.07.04 Koko
Warner (Switzerland) |
Re: discussions
about financial services to help protect the poor against disasters
In response
to R. Kuberan, Your observation about the problem of partnerships
involving financial services when poverty is prevalent is important.
Certainly many formal financial services do not operate in areas
where financial markets are shallow. However, there are growing
numbers of examples of partnerships where informal credit, micro-credit,
local level cooperatives have been used to help spread the risk
of natural disasters. Such examples also fall under the category
of "financial services." Formal insurance may be used,
but the concept of insurance--that of sharing risk between parties--is
probably of most value when talking about financial services
and partnerships to address disaster risks. My comments and examples
certainly intend to include informal as well as formal financial
services mechanisms. Your comment gave me the opportunity to
clarify that point a little bit.
Thanks. Best,
Koko Warner (Switzerland) |
|
19.07.04
Paolo Barratini (Italy) |
A disaster
destroys not only structures but also relations between people
and their own culture. External intervention here in Italy follows
political paths, politicians use the post-disaster funding and
intervention to gain political consensus as well as to gain personal
wealth.
Another issue.
The discussion of this topic is very generic. I have not seen
any quantitative parameters, like time of responses to a disaster
from current structures and/or agencies. I would like to see
a list of requirements for different situations.
Paolo Barratini
(Italy) |
|
19.07.04
Ahsan Uddin Ahmed (Bangladesh) |
Dear Colleagues,
Your continued participation in the ongoing e-conference encouraged
me to take part in it. We are currently trying to implement a voluntary
partnership activity in two flood-vulnerable areas. I would like
to share my experience on this with you.
Flood is a
frequent phenomenon in Bangladesh. Examining historical extreme
flood events, especially those occurring in 1987, 1988
and in 1998, one can easily identify voluntary partnerships of
various forms: between poor households and the local elites; community
based organizations and government; national non-government organizations
and the government;
international NGOs and the government; and finally, between local
NGOs and international NGOs. A brief account of such ‘adaptation
efforts’ has recently been published by the Stockholm International
Water Institute (SIWI) in the Abstract Volume in preparation for
the 13th Stockholm Water Week (SIWI Conference)(Ahmed, 2003).
Recently, we at the
BUP Centre for Water and Environment, in association with the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO), have been promoting
people’s self-help in local-level flood management, through
the involvement of the local government leaders and local people.
In doing so, as a test case, we developed a “Community-based
Flood Management Strategy (CFMS)” for flood-vulnerable areas
of the country, in consultation with local people.
This was firmed up by presenting in a series of Focus Group Discussions
(FGD) and through participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methods.
The development of the
CFMS was followed by development of a ‘Community-based
Flood Management Manual (CFMM)’ where specific aspects of
community self-help have been highlighted. This product was again
presented to the local people for field testing. When finalized,
we imparted training to about four flood-vulnerable communities
on various aspects of CFMM. This has immediately been put into
practice by two model flood-vulnerable areas
(Union Parishads – the smallest tier of the Government) during
this monsoon. We have early results from such activities and it
appeared to all concerned as a new mode of voluntary partnership,
with a goal to manage flood through a series of self-help and community-based
activities, has initiated a new approach to community-based flood
management.
We are excited about
the early success of the programme. It is expected that the CFMS
will become a model for the ‘Comprehensive
Disaster Management Programme’ of the Government and it will
address a number of elements of IPRSP as well as MDGs. Only time
will say, how
far the concept of CFMS might be translated into a regular practice
at the grassroots.
If you are interested to know more about the action research,
I shall be glad to provide more information on this.
Thanks.
Ahsan Uddin Ahmed (Bangladesh)
|
|
15.07.04
Edward (USA) |
Experiences which I myself have had with forecasting earthquakes
and other matters indicate to me that it is probably crucially important
that some program be established which would make it possible for
people to quickly and efficiently communicate with governments and
with disaster mitigation groups etc. around the world and also develop
effective technologies for solving health and life threatening problems.
Such a program might be run by an organization such as the United Nations and
involve the development of a special Internet Web site where lists of health
and life threatening problems would be maintained. People interested in helping
deal with and solve those problems could visit the Web site and participate in
at least three different types of activities. In connection with each problem
or general category of problems there would be:
DISCUSSION FORUMS - There would be two or three discussion forums where people
around the world could compare notes. One would be for the general public. Anyone
could post a note. With the other two forums participants would need to be registered.
Notes posted to one of them could be read by the general public. Notes posted
to the other could be read by only the forum participants.
A REFERENCE LIBRARY - Abstracts discussing research being done around the world
in connection with a given problem or general category of problems would be stored
at the Web site. Some full-length publications might also be stored there as
well as free, downloadable computer programs.
A WORKING AREA - This would involve a variety of Web site resources which would
enable independent and university affiliated researchers and government and disaster
mitigation officials to develop technologies and administrative programs intended
to actually try to solve a given problem. For example, special computer programs
(CGI programs) running at the Web site would enable people to visit data entry
Web pages and submit information to those programs. Upon being sent information
like that the programs would do things such as add the information to their databases,
evaluate them, and display them on other Web pages at the Web site. Earthquake
forecasting data submitted in such a manner by scientists around the world could
be compiled and made available to government agencies and international disaster
mitigation group personnel. Information submitted regarding torrential rain storms
in some country could be automatically processed and used to generate flood warning
messages to people living in affected areas.
It has been my personal experience that many people around the world would be
interested in participating in such efforts either as paid professionals or volunteer
workers. But in order to do that there would have to be some organization which
would maintain the Web site, establish guidelines and rules for participants,
and keep things running.
Several years ago I myself created a company here in the United States with the
intention of having it help get such a Web site established. My first formal
project related to that effort was made operational in just the past few months.
And I am going to use it here as an example to demonstrate the importance of
this type of organized Web site based effort (EM signal – Earthquake Comparison
Data http://www.freewebz.com/eq-forecasting/Data.html; Downloadable Data Evaluation
Computer Program http://www.freewebz.com/eq-forecasting/301.html; A Demonstration
Earthquake Prediction Program http://home.netcom.com/~edgrsprj/124.html).
For about a decade I have been running an informal earthquake forecasting program.
It involves evaluating what I believe are unusual electromagnetic energy field
fluctuation type signals which probably have something to do with very low frequency
radio waves. It is quite important that government agencies, international disaster
mitigation groups, and other earthquake forecasters around the world have access
to information regarding the times when those signals are detected. They can
then check for signs of approaching earthquakes in their own countries. However,
at this time there is no effective mechanism available for circulating those
types of data. What I have had to do over the years is search Internet Web sites
for the e-mail addresses of government agencies and disaster mitigation groups
around the world. And I send them my forecast data by e-mail. That recently created
Data.html Web page at my Web site represents my latest effort to make those types
of data available to the people around the world who need them. And government
scientists etc. can use the downloadable computer program available at my 301.html
Web page to process some of their own earthquake precursor data or run additional
tests on my precursor data. This is an extremely inefficient process. In many
cases when government and disaster mitigation officials are sent an earthquake
warning they have no idea how to react to it. And so I must always include detailed
instructions for how they should evaluate and respond to the data along with
each earthquake warning that I circulate. That warning process does not work
very well. And few lives which might have been saved are actually saved.
If my earthquake warning data and data being generated by other forecasters could
be made available to the appropriate government and disaster mitigation officials
around the world in an efficient and effective manner then perhaps many earthquake
related fatalities and at least some property damage might be avoided.
The main difficulty with establishing such a health and life threatening problem
solving Web site might simply involve convincing people that such an effort is
necessary and that it would work. Obtaining adequate funding to run the Web site
would probably be the second most difficult part. Because quite a few people
participating in the effort would be volunteer workers certain expenses could
be minimized.
Edward (USA) |
|
15.07.04
Christopher Effgen (USA) |
| I was happy
to read the contribution of George Ritchie about the Global Association
for
Disaster Reduction efforts. In my mind the
end of disaster mitigation is "Sustainable Development."
In the United States, in communities which regularly experience
disasters, community groups and organizations have been formed
wherein people can join and receive training in how to help
after a disaster. These groups have support because the community
has
the experience to understand the need and the value of coordinated
action in the response phase. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency, to some extent, supports groups called CERT, which
stands for Community Emergency Response Teams. The idea for
founding
these teams grew as a result of the knowledge that, when an
earthquake hit Mexico City, many people died as a result of
efforts to rescue
people trapped in buildings. In California, Florida and to
some extent in other states and localities these teams receive
training
through the local Emergency Management/Fire Departments and
support from the community and corporate sectors. They perform
functions
in support of and independent of local authorities whose resources
are overwhelmed by the scope of disasters. There are a wide
variety of other actors, Disaster Medical Assistance Teams
(DMAT) for
example are in part funded and meet standards established by
FEMA. Across the United States there are numerous groups (mostly
in association with religious organizations) that also play
a significant role in responding to local, statewide and national
disasters. Some donate labor and building materials, there
is
even one group that attempts to locate people affected by disasters
who do not qualify for Federal and State aid. Everyone involved
in these groups understands the value of the work that they
do. It isn’t just the local, state and Federal government
that responds.
Personally, I think that one of the reasons that our economy has
been sound is because of the overlapping levels of response to
disasters. I should not fail to mention the role that insurance
plays as being a major contributor to the reduction at times
when the local economy is negatively affected by the disaster.
Flooding is the one disaster in the United States that insurance
companies do not provide coverage for. The solution has been
to offer insurance to a person through insurance agencies that
is backed by the faith and credit of the Federal government.
No one is required to purchase such insurance, but it is often
required prior to securing a loan to purchase property. In this
regard the government surveys the land and rates it based upon
its probability for flooding, which forms the basis for the insurance
rate on the property. After a loss, conditions with respect to
the elevation of the living area of the dwelling can be set as
a condition for renewed insurance, which is a condition that
is also regulated by the building code and by lenders. In our
experience there are some properties that should not be insurable
for repeated losses. People outside of designated flood zones
can also purchase this insurance, but lenders do not require
it. Most construction in the United States takes place in jurisdictions
that require buildings to meet code standards. Outside of these
areas, lenders as a condition of the loan will often require
a certified inspector to approve the building plan and make certain
required inspections as the dwelling is constructed.
The success of disaster mitigation efforts depends on the three
sectors responsible for public policy properly working together.
Whatever that policy is, those representing capital and business
groups, the bureaucracy, and the legislative branch (the people)
must together develop policies towards a common goal. Voluntary
efforts do not require the cooperation of each of these sources
of power, but where they share an interest in common all energy
is available for the work at hand. Where these groups do not
or can not form common goals or where they form common goals
but they are not based on sound risk/threat management and development
policy, no amount of money can solve the sustainable development/disaster
mitigation problem.
Christopher Effgen (USA)
|
|
15.07.04
Iqbal Zuberi (Bangladesh) |
| Disaster affects all, but the better off can mitigate comparatively
easily - they can buy goods and services- and regain their pre-disaster
state. In LDCs like Bangladesh the poor get poorer. They can not
regain their previous economic state because they can not afford
mitigation measures. All their small resources sustaining them are
affected by disaster; their livelihood strategies depending on natural
resources being destroyed, they have to struggle for survival. We
see floods, droughts, riverbank erosion, cyclones - all are worsening
poverty, all efforts to reduce poverty become fruitless.
Here voluntary partnership can play a vital role. The poor should
build their own 'disaster mitigation institutions' under local
government/NGO support. In many countries/areas they exist but
are non-functional due to lack of external resources - will have
to be infused with ideas and helped to become self-supporting by
'voluntary partnership'.
Iqbal Zuberi (Bangladesh)
|
|
15.07.04
Rachel Berger (UK) |
| I would just
like to make a brief contribution. I agree that networks are not
sufficient - that there is a need to go beyond sharing of information, to
action. However, there is evidence that the networks which ITDG
has helped to set up on disaster mitigation - Duryog Nivaran
in South Asia and La Red in Latin America - have significantly
raised the profile of disaster mitigation with governments
and other organisations whose support for this approach
is needed. The networks have been channels for publishing research and enabling NGOs to work together.
ITDG's experience would echo that
of Anshu Sharma and Durgadas Mukhopudyah, on the
need both to work with communities, and to enable them to disburse funds
in accordance with their perceived needs. Our exerience is that communities
can soon gain the capacity to do this, and ITDG has sought to facilitate links between communities and government, local and
national.
I agree with Meena Bilg, about the need to bring
architects and planners on board with regard to
building technologies which enable dwellings to withstand
disasters, whether flood, typhoon or earthquake, and the relevance of
local and traditional techniques for this. In Peru ITDG developed
a building technique using local materials - basically
mud overlain on woven panels; even though we actually
funded only 100 houses, many more were since built
as people observed the strength (and low cost) of the technique,
and emulated it.
Often at issue in terms of wider promotion and
adoption of these appropriate technologies is the
professional pride/resistance of architects to promote and follow on what are seen as backward technologies, as well as
the
in-built inertia in humanitarian agencies, with bringing in solutions
from elsewhere, and the vested interests of multinationals
in the building product business.
Rachel Berger (UK)
|
|
15.07.04
Mónica
Miguel Lago (Spain) |
Some lessons learned: An example of volunteer experience
An exhibition
initiative for the general public called “understanding
the meaning… understanding the action” has been proposed
in terms of "local capacity building and training" after
the environmental disaster produced by the Prestige Oil tanker
off the Galician Coast.
The
idea originated when thousands of civilians were involved as volunteers
in cleaning
and regeneration offshore and along the
coastline. I realize the differences between technological and
natural disasters, and definitely disaster management is a difficult
subject to understand, but in that time period we found volunteer
experience an opening for preparedness and education. Integration
and simplification of the information is necessary for use with
civilian groups and maybe with decision makers… The exhibition initiative uses understood concepts and integrated
activities to make “people” discover the dimensions
of the phases of disaster reduction. It was quite simple but
also effective. It is not necessary to have a large budget for
education programmes. The art of learning scenarios should be
simple. That is why an “alphabet" (see below) has
been an adequate tool for visual impact presentation and learning
processes.
In terms of global disaster
management, the idea maybe nowadays sounds quite naïve, but we know from experience that a crisis
event is not a good moment to show the capabilities of prevention,
that is why previous “education” on understanding global
and local levels, crosscutting actions and domains is required.
The work should be done on different levels: scientific and technical;
organisational and institutional, financial and socio-economic;
and on the level of data policy.
Please note that some
of the following examples are not disaster as meaning but process
connections as disaster understanding… that
is one of the examples of volunteer presentation:
“from A Atmospheric
and Air pollution (aerosols)… from
B Biomass Reduction… from C Coastal
Erosion, Cyclone… from
D Desertification, Deforestation… from E Earthquake,
Epidemiological risk… from F Floods, Food
security, Fires… from G Glacier
Melt… from H Hazardous material, Haze Fog… from I Ice
melting (Snow hazard)… from J Jungle deforestation… from
K Kilometre disaster (actuation areas & mapping)… from
L Landsides, Land degradation… from M Mudslides… from
N el Niño… from O Oil
Spills. Ocean storm, ozone reduction… from
P Prolonged drought, Plagued, pollution general… from Q Quick
look to disasters / quick analysis… from R Refugees… from
S Storms, seismic areas… from T Tsunami,
Transportation accidents… from U urban planning
for reconstruction… from V volcanic eruption… from
W windstorm… from X axis
representation & understanding… from
Y Yellow substances- pollution identification and water quality… from
Z Zone disaster”
The identified disasters and events should be interrelated by
information fluxes, diagrams, etc... as the following fields examples
which are introducing the contents for the exhibition:
- Alphabet letter
- Disaster type
- Cycle: atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, criosphere
- Process connections: damage assessment, fluxes interaction
and parameters
- Phases of mitigation (pre-crisis-post): rescue, mitigation, cleaning
up and reconstruction
- Work levels: space community, institutions & organizations
decision makers, users…
- Chain structure: technical, organizational, operational,
finance, educational…
- Needs and resources: coordination & political integration,
capacity building,…)
- Database: development, network, assessment experience,
cooperation, collaboration…
A complementary understanding should integrate and reflect on:
- General needs
- Information needs
- Information sources
- Integration & analysis
The exhibition will host activities integrating the meaning of
disaster management: Procedural and attitudinal activities will
introduce the idea of capacity learning and capabilities, studying
the scenarios of disaster management as a subject, the crisis
processes, integration of information and evolution will give
an opportunity to use no cost methodologies as a learning & prevention
tool. Objectives, contents, instruments, contribution to the
programme, description of the measure, community added value...
etc will be also identified. Unfortunately all nations
have experienced different kind of disasters (natural & technical),
why not coordinated all lessons learned experiences to prevent
duplication efforts?
Hopefully the words above have a little bit of sense, I hope.
With my best regards to all of you,
Mónica
Miguel Lago (Spain) |
|
15.07.04
Rodney Martínez (Ecuador) |
Dear colleagues:
As an example of partnership, I want to introduce the current developments
of CIIFEN (The International Centre for Research on El Niño),
in Guayaquil Ecuador.
CIIFEN focuses on the application of scientific research and ocean
atmosphere modeling to get an early warning and generate different
risk scenarios in socio-economic activities such as agriculture,
fisheries, energy, infrastructure, water resources and the environment.
This process is completed by a strong information system which aims
to disseminate information to governments, decision makers, private
and public sectors and ordinary people, about what is going on about
El Niño, and the associated risks in relation to the phenomenon
and climate variability in the region.
CIIFEN
links science with society through risk management and information
technology, and constitutes a new approach of our
countries to face El Niño in the region and contribute to
reducing its impact.
Rodney Martínez (Ecuador)
|
|
13.07.04 Meena
Bilgi (India) |
Disaster awareness and preparedness has to start at home. With
this, awareness among the people is of utmost importance. There is
a strong need for educational institutions and academicians to revisit
the syllabus and sensitise school children about the causes of all
kinds of disasters, precautions and protection of the environment.
Builders, architects and town planners need practical and thorough
knowledge about people friendly and disaster proof buildings. And
concrete and stringent measures should be taken against those who
approve illegal and controversial constructions. (In urban areas
of Gujarat, most deaths and injuries in the 2001 earthquake were
because of illegal and extremely bad construction of buildings and/or
construction of non-disaster proof buildings)
Here the roles of legal and judicial systems comes in: their capacities
and sensitivities need to be built upon. The blending of the roles
and capacities of civil society, NGOs, all departments of the Government,
the corporate sector and academicians from varied disciplines is
the need of the hour.
Meena Bilgi (India) |
|
13.07.04 R
Kuberan (Vietnam) |
Comments on the message of Koko Warner (Switzerland) and others.
I agree that financial services will be essential for disaster mitigation,
especially in the recovery and rehabilitation phase. There should
be insurance for life, property, crops, livestock, etc.
However, in developing countries, most people who are affected by
disasters are either below or close to the poverty line, and they
may not be able to pay for the services of insurance companies. In
such cases innovative schemes will be necessary for bringing these
people under insurance coverage, with very low and affordable premium
rates. This can be in the form of group insurance or compulsory insurance,
or subsidised by government.
R Kuberan (Vietnam)
|
|
13.07.04 Jamal
Sholan (Yemen) |
There are wide differences
in the experience and understanding of ‘voluntary partnerships’ in
developing countries. But I would like to express some opinions
on voluntary work, from
our local experience in Yemen during the last 20 years:-
1- We have difficulty in co-ordinating self-help and public assistance
during the several stages of disaster (this work is actually not
organized by any one or at any level before the disaster) and developing
mechanisms for this. At the same time, how can we relate these to
other interpretations and experiences of ‘voluntary partnership’ across
the world?
2- However, there are probably some common ideas shared by different
communities and different relationships running from east to west
in the world; these ideas may be applicable to disasters.
3- During the Dhamar earthquake we received good and beneficial assistance
from volunteers and voluntary organisations all over the world; some
of these are still represented in Yemen, like Oxfam and various organizations
working under the UN.
3- To avoid confusion over terms, it would be a good idea to develop
clear frameworks for partnerships, and perhaps to rename this important
topic.
Best Regards
Jamal Sholan (Yemen) |
|
13.07.04 Leonidas
Ocola (Peru) |
Dear Participants:
An experience and comments follow.
EXPERIENCE
Developing countries appreciate very much voluntary partnership of
donors of experience and/or funding to reduce vulnerabilities
to hazard impacts. However, some NGOs come to a country
and identify a community that, at first glance, is at
risk from a natural hazard. They start, immediately, working to diminish
or eliminate vulnerabilities to what they believe is the main local
hazard. The NGO´s assessment of the level of hazard is
done on local community information, which usually is
incomplete, or defective. On the other hand, the country
might have governmental agencies with responsibility for
documenting natural phenomena and assessing levels of hazard,
that the NGO does not contact to request information. There are
natural events whose recurrence time is longer than a human generation’s
life span. Thus, information about disastrous events with long periods
of recurrence is likely to be lost in the community's memories.
COMMENTS
1. I do agree about the need of an UN-coordinating and guiding agency
to provide information on prospective stakeholder, country-official
agencies dealing with hazard, vulnerability, risk or disaster management to
get
appropriate information on the community and environmental phenomena.
It would be best, if such a UN Agency also provides seed funding
to start the partnership.
2. Developing countries appreciate very much donors of knowledge, technologies,
skills and finance, if the efforts solve community problems and do not create new ones.
Leonidas Ocola (Peru) |
|
13.07.04 Durgadas
Mukhopadhyay (India) |
Dear friends participating in the forum and UN ISDR organisers
All the parties involved in disaster reduction and disaster management
should seriously think of "collaboration between many stakeholders
and voluntary participation", as the long term problem of disasters
can not be solved by any single organisation. However, communities
involved in the disaster and grassroots organisations should get
highest priority, responsibility and funding for disaster reduction.
A large number of researchers and activists have complained that
many international organisations do not respond to civil society’s
suggestions and action plans and hardly cooperate with civil society
organisation and communities, with the excuse of being "intergovernmental
organisations", policy prescriptions, shortage of funds, etc.
Disaster is ultimately the short and long term burden of the community.
There cannot be genuine participation when significant amounts of
the money allocated for disaster management is spent on so-called
experts and consultants (the corrupt bureaucracy in some developing
countries adds to the problem). Newspapers in Bhuj, Gujarat, reported
the luxurious conditions enjoyed by some foreign consultants alongside
those faced by the victims of the 2001 earthquake Ultimately, it
is the sheer strength of the Bhuj community which has rebuilt Bhuj
with livelihood options within a remarkably short period of time,
after the consultants and charities had left.
The funds for disaster reduction could have been meaningfully distributed
among the affected people and the community on a pro-rata basis so
that they could plan and implement prevention, relief and rehabilitation
according to their priorities. Participation and collaboration without
decision-making power is meaningless!
Durgadas Mukhopadhyay (India) |
|
13.07.04 Maria
Nadiezda Otero (Bolivia) |
Dear colleagues
The disaster (flood) of February 2002 in the city of La Paz (Bolivia),
was a nice experience of voluntary help. The population spontaneously
went to the streets to help those affected, providing food, clothes,
working hours, tools, etc. Something that I never have seen in my
life, because it involved people of all the social levels and ages.
But such potential is wasted when not enough technical assistance
is given to facing potential emergencies.
In my field experiences, I have noticed that the most depressed social
groups show the most solidarity in emergency situations.
Concerning voluntary partnerships, my contributions are the following:
- Voluntary associations should be established under a main principle:
solidarity.
- It is necessary that voluntary partnerships are involved
in defined structures and take part in programs of risk
reduction at local,
national, regional level.
- Voluntary partnerships doesn't have to be a parallel topic
to those previously outlined in this dialogue.
- It is difficult to demand that people take part in voluntary
partnerships in societies where the potential contributors
are unemployed. Unemployment
is a great problem in Latin America and the Caribbean
and I suppose in other places.
- When people
have employment or incomes to live on, they will able to contribute
to voluntary partnerships
for
risk reduction
or other
issues.
- It is important to motivate children and young people
to take action in risk reduction as part of voluntary
partnerships.
- It is important to rescue the potentialities of
society in risk reduction.
- Technical support is also very important in voluntary
partnerships.
Best Regards
Maria Nadiezda Otero (Bolivia) |
|
13.07.04 John
Norton (France) |
Dear Colleagues,
Alekssandr Kuzmenko wonders why there have been so few contributions
on this topic.
I don’t think it is a question of importance, but of time:
the character of online conferences is such that the volume
of material to digest becomes overwhelming, and reaches a point where making a contribution is
daunting.
John Norton (France) |
|
13.07.04 Jean
J. Chu (USA) |
Dear Colleagues,
I recently received this local community report from the Philippines,
and believe it to be a good example of voluntary partnership. This
report, from a community-based earthquake monitoring station located
in a relatively difficult-to-access area of Luzon, speaks of teamwork
and dedication at many levels of government and in civil society.
We all still have a long way to go, but it is amazing what local
communities, when inspired, can create and produce as concrete results.
Perhaps there is, or if not, we might create, the possibility that
representatives from such breakthrough communities attend and showcase
what they have accomplished at the grass roots level, during the
January 18-22, 2005, WCDR meeting in Kobe, Japan?
With sincere regards,
Jean J. Chu (USA)
REPORT
ON THE CRUSTAL STRESS COMMUNITY AWARENESS NETWORK (CSCAN)
IN THE PROVINCE OF AURORA, PHILIPPINES
Prepared by Ana Riza S. Mendoza
Baler, Aurora, July 14, 2004
BACKGROUND
In 2000, the United Nations Global Programme for the
Integration of Public Administration and the Science
of Disasters (UNGP-IPASD) collaborated with the National
Disaster
Coordinating Council (NDCC) and the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and
Seismology (PHIVOLCS) to establish a community-based
earthquake monitoring system in the
Philippines. Called the Crustal Stress Community Awareness Network (CSCAN),
this system covers one-third of the country and involves
ten communities in Luzon.
The Province of Aurora, specifically the Municipality of Baler, was identified
as a strategic location for one of the CSCAN monitoring sites. A crustal
stress measuring sensor was installed in the compound
of Aurora National Science High
School and the monitoring equipment was placed at the former Aurora Integrated
Area Development Project (AIADP) building in Baler.
OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT
The overall objective of the project is to encourage local communities
to see and prepare ahead for natural disasters, by raising their
awareness to their
vulnerabilities and by monitoring changes in the local environment that relate
to natural events. The following are specific objectives:
- To augment the country’s capacity to conduct forecasting research
for earthquakes, by establishing a community-based monitoring network to
record crustal stress changes related to such disasters;
- To harness the participation of Local Government Units (LGUs), the community
and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in gathering scientific data and
observing environmental changes that could contribute to improving earthquake
forecasting
research; and
- To encourage the involvement of young community members, especially schoolchildren,
in observing the natural environment and in tapping the wisdom of senior
community members regarding natural disasters.
PROVINCIAL PROFILE AND SEISMIC SETTING
The Province of Aurora is located on the eastern seaboard of
Luzon and constitutes the former northern portion of Quezon Province.
Aurora Province occupies a long
and narrow strip of land that covers an area of 309,860 hectares. It has
eight (8) municipalities, namely, Baler, Casiguran, Dilasag,
Dinalungan, Dingalan,
Dipaculao, Maria Aurora and San Luis, seven of which are coastal municipalities.
The province is generally mountainous and forested although a significantly
extensive area of the flat land is presently cultivated with
crops.
With its location, the province is exposed to tropical cyclones,
and is also considered as one of the earthquake and tsunami prone
areas of the Philippines.
On September 27, 1735, a phenomenal tidal wave called "Tromba Marina" completely
destroyed the town of Baler.
On August 2, 1968, a magnitude 7.3 earthquake occurred, which
had its epicenter in Casiguran, one of the northern municipalities
of the province, where the Casiguran
Fault - East Luzon Trench Region is located. The said event was recorded
among the most damaging earthquakes in the seismic history of
the Philippines.
The Municipality of Baler, where the earthquake monitoring equipment
is installed, is the provincial capital and is located in the
central zone of Aurora Province.
PROJECT OPERATION
The CSCAN data recorders at Baler operate and conduct readings
from the crustal stress monitoring instrument twice a day, seven
days a week and 365 days a
year. Training of these data recorders by PHIVOLCS, and/or the UNGP-IPASD,
takes place
at the LGUs’ expense. The LGU is also responsible for sending in the
CSCAN data to PHIVOLCS through email, fax or telephone. The minimal electric
power
consumption of the CSCAN recording instrument is being shouldered by the agency
where the equipment is installed.
PHIVOLCS has agreed to share information with the LGU on unusual
changes in the network’s data which may indicate stress build-up
prior to a large event, and to alert the LGU should there be a
need for heightened awareness and/or more
timely observations.
It was made clear that all data recorded are for research purposes
only, specifically for conducting geologic disaster mitigation
research.
The project is based on volunteerism as there are no fees being
collected by any agency, including PHIVOLCS, for the abovementioned
tasks.
CSCAN HISTORY IN BALER, AURORA
The CSCAN concept started in January 1997 with former Secretary
Corazon Alma G. De Leon of the Civil Service Commission. By early
2000, Secretary De Leon
joined with former Marikina Mayor Bayani Fernando and former PHIVOLCS Director
Raymundo Punongbayan to create the present community-based earthquake monitoring
system of CSCAN.
A crustal stress monitoring station was built in Baler in October
2000. PHIVOLCS coordinated with the Provincial Government of
Aurora (PGA) and signed an agreement
with the Municipal Government of Baler (LGU-Baler) on the operation of the
project. As part of this agreement, LGU-Baler sent their personnel
to training conducted
by PHIVOLCS and the UNGP-IPASD for CSCAN data recorders.
The CSCAN site in Baler was set up in a building that housed
the Aurora Integrated Area Development Project (AIADP). For this
reason, in late 2000, LGU-Baler recommended
that the CSCAN data recording and transmission be done by AIADP personnel,
which the latter accepted after AIADP personnel received the
appropriate training.
In view of the fact that AIADP was a project funded by the European Union
and had only a limited time of operation, the AIADP project concluded
in December
2001.
Since the CSCAN monitoring equipment was installed in the compound
of Aurora National Science High School (ANSHS) and the AIADP
Building was donated to the
school, the task of recording the readings was then turned over to the school
administration. Seeing the importance of the experiment, the school principal
supervised the operation of the project and requested the Provincial Government
of Aurora, through the Office of the Provincial Planning and Development
Coordinator (OPPDC), to send the data by fax to the data collection
center at PHIVOLCS in
Metro-Manila. This endeavor was supported by the PPDC. On the other hand,
the regular readings are being done by trained students of ANSHS.
The technology
is then transferred to new students to keep up data recording and have them
be aware of earthquake risk mitigation. Up to the present, the
Aurora National Science
High School through its Principal, and the Provincial Planning and Development
Office, work in partnership to read and send data regularly to PHIVOLCS.
Below are the most recent series of trainings and workshops participated
in by CSCAN observers and volunteers:
- Workshop on the Enhancement of CSCAN Operation through Team-Building and
Technology-Sharing, held on June 3-7, 2002 at the PHIVOLCS Bldg, UP Diliman,
Quezon City.
- CSCAN Workshop on Community Awareness, Training and Empowerment held on
November 26-28, 2002 at the University of Northern Philippines, Vigan, Ilocos
Sur.
- Collective Strengthening of Community Awareness for Natural Disasters
(CSCAND) Earthquake Awareness Workshop for Local and Barangay (Village) Officials
held
in Infanta, Quezon on September 17-18, 2003 and Lingayen, Pangasinan on November
19-20, 2003.
DISASTER AWARENESS ENDEAVORS
Aside from the community-based earthquake monitoring system of
CSCAN, the Province of Aurora has a Provincial Disaster Coordinating
Council and eight (8) Municipal
Disaster Coordinating Councils wherein the key members are composed of the
Provincial Government, Municipal Governments, Philippine National
Police, Philippine Army,
Bureau of Fire Protection, the Philippine National Red Cross, Provincial
Social Welfare and Development Office, Department of Public Works
and Highways and PAG-ASA,
the national weather bureau. Member agencies are advocating the importance
of disaster consciousness and preparedness, be the disaster man-made
or natural.
The Provincial Government, in collaboration with its partner
agencies, is regularly observing the Fire Prevention Month and
Disaster Consciousness
Month, wherein
seminars and symposia focusing on disaster preparedness are conducted for
students and for the community as well. A series of information
drives are consistently
being done to ensure people’s responsiveness when a disaster or calamity
happens. Through these activities, people are becoming more aware of the different
types of precursors they can monitor prior to natural disasters. Among those
categories being observed related to weather and tectonic disasters are the
following:
- Color of the sky, humidity, and wind direction
-
Unusual behavior of insects (especially ants)
- Height/pressure of aquifer waters spouting out of local pipes
OUTCOMES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
With the geographical location of the Province of Aurora, it is exposed
to typhoons. The people of Aurora are very much aware of this fact, thus,
they
are aware of
the various risks that this phenomenon may bring such as floods and landslides.
On the contrary, they have limited knowledge on the hazard that earthquakes
may bring.
The establishment of a community-based earthquake monitoring
site in Baler has brought about several significant developments.
As part of the national CSCAN
team, Baler has directly contributed to seeing ahead for six earthquakes
during the time period of January 2002 through April 2003.
These results are in the
public domain, accessible by the Internet:
http://www.undp.org.ph/frontliner/archive/3-2003/cscanlong.htm
Another positive outcome is that, with the students’ direct participation
in data recording, they are now more conscious of their environment. In
line with their training on data reading, they are also informed of the
macro- and
micro-precursors of earthquakes. Their gained knowledge is then passed
on to their parents during family discussions.
With regard to future activities, it is clear that more work
at the local and national levels is necessary to have the CSCAN
system become sustainable and
effective in disaster mitigation. The Provincial Government of Aurora,
through the Provincial Disaster Coordinating Council, might
well consider conducting
earthquake preparedness and community-awareness training on a regular basis.
In this manner, the people of Aurora may understand that earthquake preparedness
is equally important as other natural and man-made disasters.
|
|
|
13.07.04 George
Ritchie (UK) |
Colleagues,
In the WCDR discussions to date there has been frequent mention of
the importance of the roles which voluntary and non-government organizations
can play in disaster reduction at both national and world-wide scales.
May I bring to your notice the Global Association for Disaster Reduction
(GADR) and invite all those interested to involve themselves in its
activities by communicating with either me or the CEO of GADR, Dr
Walter Hays, at :-walter_hays@msn.com (Note _ between walter and
hays).
GADR is a world-wide association of professionals, administrators,
academics, technologists, emergency services, police and military
officers, from government, from non-government organizations and
the private sector, whose responsibilities, or interests embrace
disaster reduction from natural, technological and the range of man-made
disasters (other than war and civil strife) and also the linkages
of such disasters with sustainable development and environmental
management.
GADR is promoting the education, public awareness and staff training
aspects of disaster reduction in association with UNESCO and is to
take a lead role in relation to those activities within the framework
of the UN Decade on Education for Sustainable Development (2004-2013).
GADR also operates in association with UNDP and the Secretariat of
ISDR and is in the process of publishing "Blueprints" prepared
by its members which provide guidance on a wide range of disaster
reduction courses of action. These will be extended in the coming
years through members' collaboration. Outlines of these "Blueprints" can
be viewed on the website, www.gadr.giees.uncc.edu (GIEES is the Global
Institute for Energy and the Environment at the University of North
Carolina, USA at which GADR is administratively based.)
GADR began as an initiative of the American Society of Civil Engineers
in 2002 and now enjoys full charitable status in the USA. Its present
membership is about 1000 with over 50 supporting organizations. It
is planned that membership should grow to about 4000 in the next
2-3 years. GADR plans to play a full part in the Kobe conference
in 2005.
George Ritchie (UK) |
|
13.07.04 Anshu
Sharma (India) |
Dear Colleagues,
It is heartening to be talking about partnerships, and not networks!
We all are aware of, and have been part of, many network based partnerships
in the past decade. Most of us have found that largely these kind
of associations fail to deliver concrete outputs in a sustained manner.
Partnerships need to be understood as mechanisms wherein each partner
has to make a `contribution' in return for what he or she gains.
We cannot just talk about exchanging knowledge. We have to go beyond
that and make the exchange more tangible.
Voluntary partnerships can extend beyond voluntary organisations.
Two weeks ago a major landslide in Joshimath, a Himalayan tourist
spot in North India, destroyed a substantial length of the only road
connecting the region to the rest of the country, and got about five
thousand persons stranded in adverse weather conditions. Government
rescue teams could not do much as their helicopters were inoperational
due to the bad weather. JP Industries, a private construction company
implementing a hydro-electric project in the area, cleared a three
kilometer long tunnel at that location, and helped the administration
evacuate the stranded people through the tunnel. There were no money
transactions involved, nothing made mandatory on anyone to act, no
visible credits or marketing mileage made available. It was a voluntary
partnership in an emergency situation. It was a partnership between
a corporate agency, the government and some community groups that
helped organise the people. One wishes such partnerships also extended
to preparedness and mitigation operations.
One also wishes that besides such innovative and appealing practices,
attention is also paid to small but time tested traditional practices.
In parts of the Assam region in the Himalayas, bamboo housing is
used in a brilliant way to resist earthquakes and floods. The flexible
and light structures shake during tremors and return to their original
forms. Floors are attached to pulleys and can be hauled up above
water levels during floods, only to be released back to ground level
once the flood recedes. This kind of housing is, however, fast giving
way to modern cement concrete construction with none of these qualities.
Can not a partnership between voluntary agencies, professionals,
academia and the government create an environment for promotion of
good traditional construction practices, perhaps with some embellishments
to enhance their appeal value?
Old people in South India and Bangladesh have a knack for predicting
cyclones. I myself have talked to an old man who had predicted the
1977 cyclone of Andhra Pradesh, which killed 10,000 people, three
days in advance. Such people have learnt from their forefathers to
watch for the way birds fly and fish swim inland, to understand what
the weather has in store. Must satellites replace such people? Can
there not be a partnership between such village elders, local volunteer
groups and local administration to act upon such warnings till the
rusty communication links with the met department creak into action?
Management of village ponds all across South Asia, and canals/kareezes
in drought prone Afghanistan have helped generations survive droughts.
Must piped water dreams mean the end of ponds and kareezes? Can not
a partnership between village councils, state water boards, voluntary
agencies, professionals and academia find viable and affordable balances
between traditional wisdom and technology?
The cases to cite are many. The bottom line is that partnerships
must mean contributions by all and outputs that help all. Education
and sustainable development are the keywords to highlight the achievements
we need to target towards effectively reducing disaster risk, particularly
in the developing world. This is also the theme for the upcoming
UN decade. I hope the WCDR will address this link, and will strive
for a deeper understanding of related issues, and establishing/strengthening
meaningful voluntary partnerships.
Best regards,
Anshu Sharma (India) |
|
13.07.04 Meda
Gurudutt Prasad (India) |
| VOLUNTARY PARTNERSHIPS-
CADME’S EXPERIENCE (INDIA)
Dear Friends,
CADME (Coastal Area Disaster Mitigation Efforts) is a network
of 20 voluntary organisations making efforts together to mitigate
the effects of disasters. The coastal area is a part of the state
of Andhra Pradesh in India which is most vulnerable to multiple
disasters, which are recurrent phenomena every year. Government
and non-governmental organisations every year spend lots of money
on relief operations.
Even though many voluntary organisations have been working on
disaster preparedness for the past few decades, their efforts are
confined to their limited geographical areas and the impact of
their efforts is very limited. For this reason, a group of these
organisations came together to form CADME. CADME’s main focus
is to establish village-level taskforce groups comprising men and
women between the ages of 18 and 35, who are physically and mentally
sound with 100 per cent commitment to help their co-villagers before,
during and after disasters. The local community identifies members
for the taskforce groups and these members undergo 21 days of disaster
preparedness training in the following fields: warning and evacuation,
emergency medical care, emergency rescue,
emergency relief and camp management, contingency plan development,
disaster drill, disaster preparedness-development.
The trained taskforce members take up responsibilities and actions
based on their interest and capacities; and the taskforce groups
are divided into emergency medical care groups, emergency rescue
groups, relief camp groups, warning and evacuation groups and emergency
rescue groups. All the trained group members along with the inhabitants
of their respective villages have developed village contingency
plans in which they have clearly indicated low lying and elevated
areas, vulnerable groups (e.g. physically and mentally challenged,
children under the age of 14, women, aged above sixty) and the
responsibility of each trained taskforce member.
To familiarize themselves with their responsibilities and tasks,
and rehearse their skills, the taskforce members organise a disaster
drill every three months. To create interest and enthusiasm among
the taskforce members, the drills simulate a post-cyclone situation
in which villagers suffer from wounds, snake bites, shock, fractures,
drowning and other common problems.
3000 taskforce members are now equipped with disaster preparedness
skills and knowledge and they are in a position not only to extend
help to their respective villagers but also to people wherever
disaster strikes.
Other disaster preparedness work takes place between disasters.
Adult education instructors talks on disaster preparedness in adult
education classes. Disaster preparedness classes are organised
for school children after school hours are over. Cyclone resistant
houses are recommended in villages prone to disasters. In this
way CADME is making efforts to integrate disaster preparedness
with on going developmental activities.
I have been working on disaster preparedness for the past two
decades and established 682 taskforce groups in 532 disaster prone
villages of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa. In view of these efforts,
the United Nations (ISDR) gave me the Sasakawa Award for the year
2003-2004.
I hope this information may be helpful to some of our friends
working with local communities in establishing voluntary partnerships.
Meda Gurudutt Prasad (India)
|
|
11.07.04
Meena Bilgi (India) |
Topic 3: Voluntary partnership? India's experience.
This is in response to Mr. R. Kuberan’s (Vietnam) observations.
I thought of sharing ( though I am sure that a majority of the contributors
on this on-line dialogue may already be aware of this) the initiatives
undertaken by the multi-stakeholder Gujarat State Disaster Management
Authority, an authority that emerged after the devastating earthquake
of 2001 in Gujarat. The initiative indeed appears to be a positive
step to understand risks, hazards, the need for networking, advocacy
and close partnerships with all stakeholders, private and public.
This two year old organisation was awarded the UN Sasakawa award
in 2003 for outstanding work in the field of disaster management
and risk reduction. The award recognizes the inclusive and innovative
approach adopted by GSDMA in disaster situations, in which many partners
and their stakeholders, both inside and outside India, provided knowledge
and resources to formulate effective policies and legislation and
prepare disaster management plans. It is one of the exceptional cases
where the award has been given to a government organization. The
authority has taken several initiatives in the direction of disaster
mitigation and preparedness such as strengthening emergency response
systems, establishment of seismological research network, large scale
training of masons and engineers, community based preparedness, various
studies on disaster management related issues and massive awareness
campaigns.
A number of countries including Japan, Taiwan, Armenia, Algeria,
Mozambique and Kenya have expressed their keen interest in collaborating
and having exchange programme with GSDMA in disaster reduction
activities. Some countries have shown interest in knowing more
about the experience of Gujarat in managing drought and organizing
water harvesting activities.
Indeed, it is important that all stakeholders willingly cooperate
with each other. In a developing country, like ours, the involvement
of relevant government organisations and officials is very important,
the partnership will achieve success quickly if a government
agency plays the lead role. Apart from this, transparency, open
mindedness are important. So is donor commitment, but more important
is a separate and recognised budget for disaster mitigation.
Consider the fact that 2% of India's GDP is lost to disasters.
India has suffered direct disaster losses of US $30 billion over
past 35 years, that is almost $1 billion a year ! A disaster
like the earthquake of Gujarat, 2001 or Orissa cyclone of 1999
can slow down the growth rate to 2% in the year immediately after
the disaster. The union budget 2004-2005 has moved closer to
risk mitigation, again a positive indicator.
Meena Bilgi (India)
|
|
11.07.04
John Twigg, moderator
Topic 3: voluntary partnerships, message from the moderator 11/7/04 |
Dear all
We were hoping for a more extensive dialogue on this topic – after
all, everyone must have some relevant experiences to share – but
I know that everyone is busy and you have had a lot of messages to
read over the past few weeks.
So I am keeping the topic open for another 2 days, until 14 July.
Please get your final thoughts in – especially if you are a
new contributor.
Best wishes
John Twigg, moderator |
|
11.07.04
Luis Wintergerst T (Mexico) |
The experience of Mexico may be relevant to this topic.
The Mexican Government is responsible for promoting and coordinating
the integration
of activities related to disaster prevention, working through national
institutions and within organizations of Mexican civil society. Therefore
a close communication link must exist between the government agencies
at the
three operative levels (federal, state and local) and civil society
organizations.
Taking the proposed criteria and guidelines for the operation of
the mechanisms and programs, we suggest adding all the academies,
colleges, scientific associations, technological and social associations,
which include a certain area fully dedicated to disaster prevention.
These organizations will develop the methodologies and best practices
from their professional and social backgrounds. Such organizations
should select some of the priority objectives of the plan, prioritize
the type of risk that may affect their region or country in order
to prepare adequate countermeasures or specific action plans.
In Mexico these organizations, societies, associations and professional
groups
Include the following:
* Geological Mexican Society
* Mexican Association of Geological Engineers.
* Mexican Association of Civil Engineers
* Mexican Hydraulics Association
* Mexican Association of Transportation Engineering
* Mexican Association of Ground
* Mexican Asphalt association
* Urban Engineering National Association
* Administrative Engineers Mexican Society
* Valuation Civil Engineering Association
* Rock Mechanics Mexican Association
* Mexican Association for Project Managers on Civil Construction
* Structural Engineering Mexican Association
* Oceanic Engineering Mexican Association
* Underground and Tunnels Engineering Mexican Association
It is extremely recommendable that representatives of the ISDR participate
on the WSSD to share the type of benefits and course of action required
for
disaster prevention and risk reduction for such sustainable growth
programs.
It is quite beneficial that the ISDR assess and update all the organizations
and programs in order to accomplish their objectives, and proceed
to publish the models, programs, plans and specific actions which have worked
appropriately regionally, nationally and worldwide.
All the above organizations and associations are available and willing
to
participate on the development of programs and plans towards disaster
prevention and risk reduction from their specific scientific and
technical
background to satisfy the general objectives proposed on Topic One.
Kind Regards,
Luis Wintergerst T (Mexico) |
|
11.07.04 Koko
Warner (Switzerland), Laurens Bouwer, Holger Hoff |
Dear Forum,
Many examples of partnerships for disaster management exist, and
some of these
examples include financial services. There is a role for financial
services to
play in disaster management, particularly to dampen the negative
livelihood
impacts of both sudden and slow onset events. Financial services,
in
partnership with governments and civil society, can play a role in
at least
three important ways:
1. risk management
2. shape incentives to reduce risk
3. public private partnerships
Sustainable development should include measures that guarantee an
acceptable
level of resilience in relation to impacts of natural hazards. The
resilience
can be expressed as the extent of both economic and non-economic
losses
following natural hazards, together with a capacity to recover. In
sustainable
systems, overall resilience is affected by sound investments in disaster
preparedness, relief measures, and in the longer term, in the adaptive
structural and non-structural measures.
Financial services can — in coordination with other appropriate
disaster
management practices — enhance the ability to cope with sudden-
and gradual-
onset events and increase the overall resilience of societies to
natural
hazards. A wide spectrum of formal and informal financial arrangements
exists
to manage and reduce risk associated with these events.
Financial services can play an important role in risk management,
by
transferring and sharing risk. Risk transfer products like insurance
redistribute risk from one party to another, and help those parties
manage
liquidity and solvency constraints when shocks occur. Property-,
life-, micro-
and re-insurance provide premium payers an immediate resource buffer
following
a disaster. Risk sharing distributes risk among the group that faces
the risk,
such as micro-credit participants or taxpayers. Financial services
can provide
mechanisms for countries and communities to share risk efficiently,
and
provide resources for reconstruction and rehabilitation. Governments
can
utilize financial services such as disaster reserve funds, insurance
for
public infrastructure, social protection funds for rapid assistance
and
reconstruction, index-based crop insurance contracts for food securities,
and livelihood protection for the poor such as work-fare projects.
Financial services can also help shape incentives to reduce risk—measures
that
lessen social and economic disruption and improve resilience to weather-
related extremes. At the community and household levels, appropriate
building
standards and zoning regulations can be encouraged through programs
that
couple insurance with well-enforced building codes to reduce future
damage.
Financial services can encourage risk reduction by coupling building
standards
and appropriate land-use practices with loan and mortgage conditions.
Other
financial services can provide incentives that help households in
vulnerable
areas diversify their livelihoods and make changes that enhance resilience
to
gradual-onset extreme events. Public-private partnerships can also
provide
financial services such as a project in the Caribbean designed to
stimulate
disaster reduction and shorten the recovery period. The project helped
improve
financial management of regional disasters and created a regional
reinsurance
mechanism to increase risk retention, including arrangements to establish
ex
ante catastrophe reserves.
At present, there are large differences between developed and developing
countries in the level and type of participation of financial services
in
disaster management. For example, provision of financial services
such as
insurance is greatest in countries with high per-capita income. In
these areas
financial services are well developed and a generally higher ability
to pay
premiums for disaster coverage exists. Yet, the relative losses in
lower
income countries appear significantly higher, and the poor bear a
disproportionate burden of disaster impacts. Almost half of the $65
billion in
economic losses related to disasters in 1998 were caused by the Yangzte
River
flood, and when Hurricane Mitch is figured in, two-thirds of total
economic
losses in 1998 were related to hydro-meteorological disasters in
the developing
world. Insurance coverage of these losses are rarely insured. Other
financial
services are available mainly during the relief and recovery period,
and much
less as a part of investments for preparedness and adaptation measures.
In
contrast, in developed countries, the financial sector seems to be
gradually
increasing its “share” in each of the three components
which affect overall
resilience: preparedness, relief and investments in structural and
non-
structural adaptive measures.
The path towards risk sharing and risk reduction is characterized
by both
challenges and opportunities. Currently, the availability of formal
financial
services in developing countries is low, and informal financial services
require greater understanding. Challenges include:
• Lack of effective regulatory frameworks,
• uncertain financial capacity to absorb catastrophic losses, and
• insufficient access to historic data on natural hazards, which limits
the estimation of probable maximum losses.
Other information challenges include the need to better understand
the
distributive impacts of extreme events, and improved access to economic
information about households, regulatory restrictions, reinsurance
capacity,
legislative frameworks, and uncertainties in rates of economic development.
Overcoming the challenges of information about natural hazards, and
the
provision of financial services in developing areas will allow policy
makers
and other stakeholders to begin implementing programs that improve
adaptive
capacity.
While challenges exist, we also face an unprecedented time of opportunity.
Research has indicated that although many questions about hazard
variability,
local changes and extreme weather events remain, the types of events
that are
most likely to occur in different regions are known. It is possible
to
estimate the resources an area will need to cover its potential loss
exposure.
Coupled with specific knowledge about the exposure of regions to
certain
events, policy makers can begin to assess the financial resources
and programs
needed to effectively address natural hazard risk.
Possibilities exist to foster greater public-private partnerships
to provide
financial services for risk management and risk reduction, following
the
principles of sustainable development. Reducing the vulnerability
of countries
and households to sudden- and gradual-onset events must become a
policy
priority. Failure to prepare societies for projected impacts of natural
hazards could lead to unsustainable development that is ill suited
to future
conditions, as well as missed opportunities to lower the costs of
adaptation.
The scientific, political, economic, and social stakeholders should
jointly
recognize the need to address the losses and social impacts of weather
extremes. These types of partnerships—including financial services—could
provide solutions to some of the key challenges faced by all countries
that
must manage disaster risk.
Sincerely,
Koko Warner (Switzerland), Laurens Bouwer, Holger Hoff |
|
11.07.04 Tomukum
Chia (Cameroon) |
Dear colleagues,
It is important for voluntary agencies to co-ordinate operations closely with UN agencies so that duplication can be avoided.
Any disaster programme needs funding, and for voluntary organisations,
this is dependent upon community or donor response, and government participation.
Again, voluntary partnership must be appropriate to the local context.
All voluntary partnerships should focus and address the problems or issues at stake
and should be people centred.
Warm regards,
Tomukum Chia (Cameroon) |
|
11.07.04
Massimo de Franchi (El Salvador) |
Dear colleagues,
During the last five years our NGO Communidad (El Salvador) has been
working on local development with a focus on natural disasters.
Once the main local actors have been identirfed, the methodology
has been on sensitizing them about the prevention of risk within
local development (and on emergency intervention when natural events
produce disasters). The whole focus should be based on the voluntary
participation of the actors: mayors, the local governments' elected
members, local leaders, professionals, and citizens in general.
To reach the final objective – that is to combine the development
of local potentialities and the decrease of the impacts of the natural
events with disaster character – voluntary partnerships were
formed for:
- historical
investigation into past disasters, their impact and their possible
repetition;
- building
awareness that a disastrous event can be repeated, and therefore
that it is necessary to prevent it with
social preparation,
technical observation and technical interventions;
- the creation
of a simple computer technology adapted to the conditions of
local society for observation and
simulation, comprehensible to
most of the citizens so that everybody is involved in
prevention;
- training
of local leaders and school teachers to produce communication
instruments with the purpose also of
maintaining the alertness of
the population;
- developing
manuals and appropriate training courses adapted to the responsibilities
of all the actors
and their capacities for understanding
the prevention of risks development of local potential.
This methodology has been applied (in different ways according to
the project and the place) in Colombia (Pereira), El Salvador (Guadalupe),
Dominican Republic, Honduras (20 Municipalities of the North East)
and Algeria (50 Municipalities of the North East).
R Kuberan (Vietnam) said that in a developing country, government
officials may not take sufficient interest in running a partnership.
But the involvement of relevant government organisations and officials
is very important.
So far I agree with Elizabeth Benites who indicates that “Legislators
should be better linked with national implementing authorities (e.g.
health, education, tourism, finances and environment); and local
authorities (e.g. municipality, health, education, tourism, environment,
chamber of commerce, foundations)to make them aware of potential
disaster/public health crises.” All the external influences
should point to the creation of a “local partnership climax” where
the mayor and local elected people are aware of the early warning
system and the permanent risk preparation team. And I also
agree that early warning systems must have agreement between
all actors,
public and private, corporations and individual.
Best regards
Massimo de Franchi (El Salvador
|
|
11.07.04 Alekssandr
Kuzmenko (Ukraine) |
Dear colleagues,
It seems there are few contributions to Topic 3 (Voluntary partnership) in comparison with Topics 1 and 2.
I am speculating about this matter and I assume that this topic is
not so essential for developed countries due to their satisfactory
governmental system when the most significant role in disaster
reduction is played by governments. In developing countries NGOs mostly do not deal with disaster reduction matters
(it is my
supposition).
If I am right it shows:
- sponsors’/donors’ preferences,
- the need to change the state of the art if we are interested in
real disaster reduction.
Regards,
Alekssandr Kuzmenko (Ukraine) |
|
11.07.04
Masayuki KITAMOTO (Japan) |
Dear Colleagues,
The on-line conference has entered into the 3rd phase and I
believe that the constructive and insightful comments so far
mentioned
here will be of productive input for the WCDR. Since
topic three is quite important in
terms of identifying concrete and practical ways to implement disaster
reduction initiatives, the following points seem to be imperative
to design effective operational modalities at the ground level.
- It has
been pointed out by various studies and discussed at so many forums
that disaster reduction is a MUST for ensuring sustainable development. The correlation between disaster characteristics
and human
development variables always suggests that there should be a
community centered and proactive implementation
mechanism to ensure development is sustained.
- The UN
has already identified the Millennium Development Goals. Without
a strong linking mechanism between disaster reduction initiatives
and formulas to achieve the MDGs, I believe that the desired results
and benefits of development cannot be achieved. Essential livelihood assets
and options necessary to support the poorest to bounce back
should be facilitated through this linking mechanism.
- There
must be an initiative to mainstream access to public and development
resources by the local households in the context of disaster reduction.
This could be realised through linkages and relationship-building
with inter and intra community service providers, leading
to the empowerment of the who are the victims and first responders to disasters.
- There
must be a link established between disaster reduction initiatives
and existing UN development frameworks. I would like to stress that
organizations at the grass-root level and local NGOs could
be brought under this framework to ensure the
horizontal and vertical relationship between the line agencies to ensure smooth implementation of
strategies.
- Involvement
of communities is essential to raise awareness of disaster
risk reduction. In this connection, partnerships with participation of
communities should be developed. It is equally important to establish
national mechanisms, involving the international community,
to support partnerships so that their
activities would be effective and efficient.
Masayuki KITAMOTO (Japan)
|
|
08.07.04
Carmen Schlosser (France) |
| Dear participants,
I
have been following the dialogue with interest since its inception.
My background has more to do with environmental issues than strictly
speaking disaster risk reduction or risk management. Let me express
a little disappointment as I would have liked to see more concrete
recommendations and examples of what works come out of the debate.
It is always interesting to state differently what we all know
and have read many times but how difficult it is to pin it down
to the "how to do it" so that people become less affected
by the impacts of disasters.
Maybe one vehicle to get things moving in that direction is through
partnerships that cut across disciplines and sectors, professional
and administrative up-bringings, and reconcile the top-down with
the bottom-up approach. One major focus of such partnership mechanism,
in my opinion, should be to put disaster risk reduction in the
perspective of safe and sound development.
Such a mechanism that should be seen as an intrinsic element of
the follow-up mechanism of the WCDR outcomes should allow for the
engagement of as many stakeholders as possible in a consultative
process to share views and experiences on how to proceed and improve
performance of policies and measures agreed upon and then implemented.
I see part of the solution to the growing impacts of disasters
lying with international coordination and support and part of it
in the realm of governments and communities. By working together
with our strengths and weaknesses, we'll advance faster. There
is a lot to do to review lessons learnt and evaluate the functioning
of this or that agency; however there is an even more urgent need
to implement measures that will enhance people's resilience when
the next disaster strikes.
Having worked with international organizations for a long time,
I still believe that it is better to have them than not, even though
I agree with a lot of the critics about their functioning and waste
of money. I hope that thanks to the information technology revolution
we are going through, their role as catalyst and idea generator
can become more powerful as expamplified by such online dialogues.
Let me finish by saying that I see such a catalyst role being played
by the ISDR in the organization of the follow-up process that should
allow governments to be held accountable for the commitments they
make at Kobe.
Carmen Schlosser (France)
|
|
08.07.04 Mlenge
Fanuel Mgendi (Tanzania) |
Voluntary partnerships
are especially important where the levels of awareness of
disaster issues and enforcement of compliance with risk reduction measures need to be addressed.
Institutions, particularly those in the private sector, may not be implementing
measures that reduce risk of disasters out of sheer lack of awareness that risk reduction measures are good for their businesses
too.
In Tanzania, The Disaster Management Training Centre (DMTC) cooperates both
with the central government in distributing the country's disaster management policy, National Operation Guidelines for disaster response,
and the National Vulnerability Assessment report to the participants
of various courses conducted at the DMTC, coming from
the Government, NGOs and private sector. In so doing, it raises awareness among the other
sectors about disaster-related matters. The result of this is that
companies have started to see the importance of planning
for disasters and assessing their property for disaster vulnerability reduction, and involve
DMTC
towards that end.
Mlenge Fanuel Mgendi (Tanzania) |
|
08.07.04
Jacques Paré (
El Salvador) |
Dear moderator and forum,
I was pleased to read Alekssandr.Kuzmenko’s comments on NGOs’ problems.
I am totally in agreement.
The empowerment of a community to change from fatalism to manage
its own risks and vulnerabilities doesn't happens within a year or
two. It is a long term process, and mind you it is probably longer
for the country’s government.
Therefore, voluntary partnership need a long term funding and exchange
of "savoir-faire".
If I may add something else. In many cases the people who get involved
in international cooperation and are the so-called "experts" are
in fact newly graduated students or about to be, who are seeking experiences.
Their theoretical knowledge may be sound and dependable, but it is
theoretical. Countries with development problems, need more than
that. They need more also than passing-through consultants. They
need experienced practitioners. Those may be coupled with that youth
energy of those who are going to be one day experienced practitioners.
Best regards.
Jacques Paré ( El Salvador) |
|
07.07.04 John
Twigg (moderator)
Topic 3: voluntary partnerships, message
from the moderator |
Dear colleagues,
We are beginning to receive contributions to Topic 3 – but
remember that the topic and the dialogue close on 11 July, so make
sure you send your contributions.
As before, we are particularly keen to obtain examples of good (or
bad) practice in the area of voluntary partnerships.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes
John Twigg (moderator) |
|
07.07.04 Alekssandr
Kuzmenko (Ukraine) |
Dear colleagues,
The idea of supporting voluntary partnerships for disaster reduction
looks like a Move:
- to fundamentally increase the number of key actors involved in
disaster reduction activities; and
- to really co-ordinate their efforts and goals,
The offer to link partnerships for disaster reduction and partnerships for
sustainable development is sequential and actual, particularly taking into
account Agenda 21, where there is a chapter devoted to safety of settlements.
The items in the Part III Document are appropriate and workable.
I would like to suggest making the first sentence more
specific: "It
is suggested that governments and other organizations should implement voluntary,
multi-stakeholder partnerships CONCERNED WITH DISASTER REDUCTION
to support ..."
The struggle against disasters is an endeavour to provide ourselves
with resources: knowledge, technologies, personnel, skills,
finances. Fundraising has a special significance for NGOs
due to their being forced to orientate their activity
in accordance with sponsors’ preferences. Foundations
do not like to support an NGO twice, year by year. Many
NGOs with a good start came to a standstill because of shortage of finances.
It will be remarkable if a co-ordinator of world wide disasters reduction activity
has its own funds to support voluntary activity and if funding supports a step by step realization of a programme adopted at the level of
the UN.
In this regard I think not only a register of partnerships involved
in disasters reduction is necessary but a fund to support
such partnerships also.
Sincerely,
Alekssandr Kuzmenko (Ukraine) |
|
07.07.04 Ilan
Kelman (UK) |
Partnerships
must include the corporate sector. See, for example, http://www.benfieldhrc.org/SiteRoot/
disaster_studies/csr/csr_index.htm for
a series of reports on Corporate Social Responsibility and Disaster
Reduction.
One challenge is making corporate partnerships lasting, counter to
the
predominant focus of many companies on short-term profits. For example,
for
many corporations, PhD dissertations with a minimum duration of three
years
are too long to take significant interest in, particularly since
results are
unlikely in the first two years and public results (publications)
are not
always available until the PhD dissertation is nearly finished. Another
barrier seen frequently is the inability of parties to communicate
properly
with each other or to put in the effort required to work through
communication difficulties.
Any thoughts on how to better engage the corporate sector in long-term
voluntary partnerships, and how to convince the corporate sector
that they
should be more fully engaged, would be of interest.
Ilan Kelman (UK) |
|
07.07.04
Dra. Elizabeth Benites Estupiñan (Ecuador) |
I would like to suggest the following
STRATEGIES IN AREAS OF PERMANENT RISK OF NATURAL OR MAN-MADE DISASTERS.
1.-Relationships between administrators and legislators.
Legislators should be better linked with national implementing
authorities (e.g. health, education, tourism, finances
and environment); and local authorities (e.g. municipality,
health, education, tourism, environment, chamber of commerce,
foundations)to make them aware of potential disaster/public health
crises.
2.-Mobilization of the community
Work with civil, military, tourist and other authorities, travel
agencies, foundations, international organisations and others among
the affected
population, in each county, to get their commitment to participation
and support for the
mobilization and maintenance of operative plans.
3.-Publicity.
Through the media transmit messages to make people aware of the
warning and evacuation plans for the affected community. Use a wide
range of media.
4. - Interpersonal communication.
Promote strategic alliances between leaders, communities and health
promoters
so that in home visits they sensitize families. Likewise, work with
personnel in
the ministries of health, education and tourism; foundations, the
private sector,
tourist and environmental sectors, Governorships and organized communities
and others
to share information and co-operate in implementation.
5. - Promotion
Form strategic alliances with unions and companies, so that they
act as multipliers of the
effort to promote behavioral changes at community level, through
delivery of education and
information, in different forms, guided specifically towards behaviour
in response to early
warnings of natural disasters or those caused by the man.
Dra. Elizabeth Benites Estupiñan (Ecuador)
|
|
06.07.04 R.
Kuberan (Vietnam) |
Vietnam experience
As already mentioned in my contribution to Topic 2, a Natural Disaster
Mitigation Partnership (NDM-Partnership) was set-up in Vietnam and
the first phase of the partnership was implemented successfully.
The following is the summary of the effectiveness of the partnership
mechanism in Vietnam. Some information given here may be repetitive
of my earlier contribution.
The idea of setting up a partnership for DM was conceived after devastating
flood disasters in 1999. It took over two years to bring the partners
together, to complete the formalities and to establish a Secretariat.
The Government of Vietnam, several donor countries and many International
NGOs formed the partners.
In a period of about 20 months (the first phase of the partnership)
a good information sharing mechanism (website: http://www.undp.org.vn/ndm-partnership;
quarterly newsletter) was set-up. The newsletter and website have
been appreciated by many organisations that have used the information
from these sources.
Coordination among the partners was much improved. The partnership
Secretariat encouraged a regular information-sharing-monthly meeting
of the INGOs, involved the donors and government agencies into the
group and developed tools and methodologies for making joint assessment
of disaster relief need after a disaster. This eliminated the necessity
for each NGO to send a team to the field for assessing the requirements
before planning relief activities, as was being practised earlier.
However, certain objectives of the partnership could not be achieved – the
most important being “policy dialogue”. The main reason
for this was identified as minimal involvement of the relevant
government agency, despite commitment. Therefore when the second
phase of the
partnership was designed, capacity building within the government
system was also incorporated.
Having played a key role in the NDM-Partnership in Vietnam, I would
like to make the following observations:
- A partnership
with government agencies, donor countries, NGOs and other social
organisations and private sector organisations will
be successful in disaster mitigation if all parties willingly
cooperate with each other.
- The partnership
concept, though it may be slow in the beginning, will eventually
work in bringing about coordination and
cooperation among the partners.
- In a developing
country, government officials may not take sufficient interest
in running a partnership. But
the involvement of relevant
government organisations and officials is very important.
- UN agencies
can definitely play a key role in bringing about partnerships
for disaster mitigation.
- If an
UN agency or a Government agency plays the lead role, the partnership
will achieve success quickly.
- The government
should be transparent to provide relevant information on policy
issues and should
be open for
discussion among the partners
for the ultimate benefit of the nation.
- Collecting
together various NGOs to form a partnership will also be not
that easy in the beginning,
as various NGOs may be competing
against each other in their field activities,
and fund raising for their activities.
- Donor
commitment is essential for meeting the running expenditure
of the partnership. In
order to ensure
continued donor interest,
all partners should be continuously informed
about developments and should be involved in
various
activities of the partnership,
by following
a participatory approach.
R. Kuberan (Vietnam) |
|
05.07.04 John
Twigg (moderator)
Topic 3: voluntary partnerships, message from moderator 5/7/04 |
See part
III of support document: Voluntary
partnerships
|
| |
For
details about the WCDR and its preparatory process, please
click here www.unisdr.org/wcdr
|
| |
| For
discussion and feedback: |
|
|
| John Twigg (moderator) |
|
|